Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparing Two Multi-Criteria Methods for Prioritizing Wetland Restoration and Creation Sites Based on Ecological, Biophysical and Socio-Economic Factors

  • Published:
Water Resources Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Wetland restoration has been recognized as a useful tool for improving water quality. Many studies have focused on developing strategies and models to optimize wetland performance. However, some important wetland placement characteristics have not been taken into account. In this research and unlike other studies, we included the social aspect (availability of public lands) as a fundamental factor to locate wetlands. Thus, environmental, biophysical and socio-economic factors were integrated through the comparison of two multi-criteria methods (a suitability model and a greedy algorithm). With nitrate removal as the main goal, the suitability model was applied considering the “terrain slope”, “proximity to watercourses” and “soil permeability”. The greedy algorithm was executed based on the “availability of public lands” and the “wetland restoration project costs”. These factors were chosen based on the Eu Life-CREAMAgua Flumen River project, which was carried out previously in the study area. Both the suitability model and the greedy algorithm provided critical information for siting a wetland and demonstrated the effectiveness of both approaches. By means of this study, we present highly applicable results as they are based on a real project (Eu Life-CREAMAgua Flumen River project), besides proposing and using the social factor as an innovative approach for the wetlands siting. This research and its possible adaptations can be used by decision makers to improve water quality using social and economic criteria, resulting in the efficient implementation of ecological-restoration projects.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Acreman MC, Fisher J, Stratford CJ, Mould DJ, Mountford JO (2007) Hydrological science and wetland restoration: some case studies from Europe. Hydrol Earth Syst Sc 11(1):158–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Almendinger JE (1998) A method to prioritize and monitor wetland restoration for water-quality improvement. Wet Ecol Mana 6(4):241–252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arnold JG, Srinivasan R, Muttiah RS, Williams JR (1998) Large area hydrologic modeling and assessment part I: model development. J Am Water Resour Assoc 34(1):73–89. doi:10.1111/j.1752-1688.1998.tb05961.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baban SJ, Wan-Yusof K (2003) Modelling optimum sites for locating reservoirs in tropical environments. Water Resour Manag 17(1):1–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Comín FA, Menéndez M, Pedrocchi C, Moreno S, Sorando R, Cabezas A, García M, Rosas V, Moreno D, González E, Gallardo B, Herrera JA, Ciancarelli C (2005) Wetland restoration: integrating scientific-technical, economic and social perspectives. Ecol Restor 23(3):181–186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Comín FA, Sorando R, Darwiche-Criado N, García M, Masip A (2014) A protocol to prioritize wetland restoration and creation for water quality improvement in agricultural watersheds. Ecol Eng 66:10–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darwiche-Criado N, Comín FA, Sorando R, Sánchez-Pérez JM (2015a) Seasonal variability of NO3− mobilization during flood events in a Mediterranean catchment: the influence of intensive agricultural irrigation. Agric Ecosyst Environ 200:208–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darwiche-Criado N, Jiménez JJ, Comín FA, Sorando R, Sánchez-Pérez JM (2015b) Identifying spatial and seasonal patterns of river water quality in a semiarid irrigated agricultural Mediterranean basin. Environ Sci Pollut R. doi:10.1007/s11356-015-5484-5

    Google Scholar 

  • Darwiche-Criado N, Comín FA, Masip A, García M, Eismann SG, Sorando R (2016) Effects of wetlands restoration on nitrate removal in an irrigated agricultural area: the role of in-stream and off-stream wetlands. Ecol Eng. doi:10.1016/j.ecoleng.2016.03.016

    Google Scholar 

  • Giupponi C, Eiselt B, Ghetti PF (1999) A multicriteria approach for mapping risks of agricultural pollution for water resources: the Venice lagoon watershed case study. J Environ Manag 56(4):259–269

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haycock NE, Pinay G, Walker C (1993) Nitrogen retention in river corridors: European perspective. Ambio 22:340–346

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmann CC, Rysgaard S, Berg P (2000) Denitrification rates predicted by nitrogen-15 labeled nitrate microcosm studies, in situ measurements and modeling. J Environ Qual 29(6):2020–2028

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jasrotia AS, Majhi A, Singh S (2009) Water balance approach for rainwater harvesting using remote sensing and GIS techniques, Jammu Himalaya, India. Water Resour Manag 23(14):3035–3055

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kadlec RH, Knight RL (1996) Treatment wetlands. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  • Kotti IP, Sylaios GK, Tsihrintzis VA (2016) Fuzzy modeling for nitrogen and phosphorus removal estimation in free-water surface constructed wetlands. Environ Process 3(1):65–79. doi:10.1007/s40710-016-0177-8

  • Leonardson L, Bengtsson L, Davidsson T, Persson T, Emanuelsson U (1994) Nitrogen retention in artificially flooded meadows. Ambio 23(6):332–341

    Google Scholar 

  • Lesta M, Mauring T, Mander Ü (2007) Estimation of landscape potential for construction of surface-flow wetlands for wastewater treatment in Estonia. Environ Manag 40(2):303–313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martín-Queller E, Moreno-Mateos D, Pedrocchi C, Cervantes J, Martínez G (2010) Impacts of intensive agricultural irrigation and livestock farming on a semi-arid Mediterranean catchment. Environ Monit Assess 167:423–435

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mdee OJ (2015) Spatial distribution runoff in ungauged catchments in Tanzania. Water Utility Journal 9:61–70

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitsch WJ, Jorgensen SE (2003) Ecological engineering and ecosystem restoration. John Wiley and Sons, Hoboken

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitsch WJ, Wilson RF (1996) Improving the success of wetland creation and restoration with know-how, time, and self-design. Ecol App 6(1):77–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moreno-Mateos D, Mander Ü, Pedrocchi C (2010) Optimal location of created and restored wetlands in Mediterranean agricultural catchments. Water Resour Manag 24(11):2485–2499

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newbold S (2005) A combined hydrologic simulation and landscape design model to prioritize sites for wetlands restoration. Environ Model Assess 10(3):251–263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmeri L, Trepel M (2002) A GIS-based score system for siting and sizing of created or restored wetlands: two case studies. Water Resour Manag 16(4):307–328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petursdottir T, Aradottir AL, Benediktsson K (2013) An evaluation of the short-term progress of restoration combining ecological assessment and public perception. Restor Ecol 21(1):75–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phua MH, Minowa M (2005) A GIS-based multi-criteria decision making approach to forest conservation planning at a landscape scale: a case study in the Kinabalu area, Sabah, Malaysia. Landscape Urban Plan 71(2–4):207–222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson MS, Gatti RC (1999) Prioritizing wetland restoration activity within a Wisconsin watershed using GIS modeling. J Soil Water Conserv 54:537–542

    Google Scholar 

  • Saroinsong F, Harashina K, Arifin H, Gandasasmita K, Sakamoto K (2007) Practical application of a land resources information system for agricultural landscape planning. Landscape Urban Plan 79(1):38–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schimming CG, Schrautzer J, Reiche EW, Munch JC (2001) Nitrogen retention and loss from ecosystems of the Bornhoved lake district. In: Tenhunen JD, Lenz R, Hantschel R (eds) Ecological studies 147: ecosystem approaches to landscape Management in Central Europe. Springer, Berlin, pp 97–116

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Store R, Kangas J (2001) Integrating spatial multi-criteria evaluation and expert knowledge for GIS-based habitat suitability modeling. Landscape Urban Plan 55(2):79–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sutton MA, Howard C, Erisman JW, Billen G, Bleeker A, Grennfelt P, Van Grinsven H, Grizzetti B (2011) The European nitrogen assessment. University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Swinson B, Cockerill K, Colby J, Tuberty S, Gu C (2015) To restore or not to restore: assessing pre-project conditions of a habitat restoration project on the New River, North Carolina. Environ Process 2(4):647–668. doi:10.1007/s40710-015-0111-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trepel M, Palmeri L (2002) Quantifying nitrogen retention in surface flow wetlands for environmental planning at the landscape-scale. Ecol Eng 19(2):127–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Underhill LG (1994) Optimal and suboptimal reserve selection algorithms. Biol Conserv 70(1):85–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Lonkhuyzen RA, LaGory KE, Kuiper JA (2004) Modeling the suitability of potential wetland mitigation sites with a geographic information system. Environ Manag 33(3):368–375

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang X, Yu S, Huang GH (2004) Land allocation based on integrated GIS-optimization modeling at a watershed level. Landscape Urban Plan 66(2):61–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White D, Fennessy S (2005) Modeling the suitability of wetland restoration potential at the watershed scale. Ecol Eng 24(4):359–377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zedler JB (2003) Wetlands at your service: reducing impacts of agriculture at the watershed scale. Front Ecol Environ 1(2):65–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zucca A, Sharifi AM, Fabbri AG (2008) Application of spatial multi-criteria analysis to site selection for a local park: a case study in the Bergamo Province, Italy. J Environ Manag 88(4):752–769

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study is part of the European Project Life09 ENV/ES/000431 CREAMAgua, which is coordinated and led by Comarca de Los Monegros-Aragón. We also thank the project’s partners: Confederación Hidrográfica del Ebro, KV Consultores and Tragsa, IEM and FJDM. We are also very appreciative of M. García and A. Barcos for their laboratory assistance.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Instituto Pirenaico de Ecología-CSIC, Av. Victoria s/n, 22700 Jaca, Huesca//Av. Montañana 1005, 50059, Zaragoza, Spain

    Nadia Darwiche-Criado, Ricardo Sorando, Silvia G. Eismann & Francisco A. Comín

Authors
  1. Nadia Darwiche-Criado
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ricardo Sorando
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Silvia G. Eismann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Francisco A. Comín
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nadia Darwiche-Criado.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Darwiche-Criado, N., Sorando, R., Eismann, S.G. et al. Comparing Two Multi-Criteria Methods for Prioritizing Wetland Restoration and Creation Sites Based on Ecological, Biophysical and Socio-Economic Factors. Water Resour Manage 31, 1227–1241 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-017-1572-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-017-1572-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation